Whedonesque : Comments on 9347<br><br>SciFi : Firefly Season 2????

Bull

I just signed up because I'd like to see how far this could go. One question, however. Does this have Joss's blessing? That's the key - if it doesn't, I doubt if it's going to come to fruition.

Patrick13 | January 23, 19:28 CET

This has been posted here twice already and removed. I expect this thread will suffer the same fate shortly.

RavenU | January 23, 19:30 CET

It seems highly unlikely.

war_machine | January 23, 19:33 CET

Cider - be very careful with this one. It has raised a great many issues.

gossi | January 23, 19:40 CET

This has already been discussed and removed from this site twice. There is nothing official from anyone, so far it's just some unknown, supposed production company making alot of noise.

Do not be surprised if this link gets removed.

herb | January 23, 19:42 CET

Well - that's why I couldn't find it in the archive's then! I was very sceptical about it myself - just wondered if you guys had the same feelings as me - if someone wants to remove it - please go right ahead - I certainly would't want to be responsible for this going any further than it should.

Cider | January 23, 19:48 CET

To be honest, I'm hoping one of the topics survives herb - so Joss sees it. The person claims to have contacted Joss' camp (and the actors), but overall I'm not convinced those in the know have much involvement in it.

I think it's great if companies can fund things like this, but this much publicly is a little troublesome.

I'm surprised any company would consider funding something like this at this stage, to be honest.

[ edited by gossi on 2006-01-23 17:50 ]

gossi | January 23, 19:48 CET

The trouble with removing it is that the second someone see the website that hasn't seen one of these posts already it will pop up again... and again... and again...

Might be better to leave it with a disclaimer that it is infact unfounded rumour, sound and fury, signifying nothing.

war_machine | January 23, 20:01 CET

I agree - I certainly don't get the chance to look at this site every day - so if an item comes and goes within a day - I don't see it. On the other hand, a lot of other websites probably use this site as a source of news and might not take the time to read all the posts associated with an item. So not deleting it could mean it spreads all over the interweb.

Cider | January 23, 20:04 CET

I haven't read those past deleted threads, so I may not see the big picture here - but at first sight I can't see the harm in this. It's very likely that it's just a stunt to garner some fan goodwill and publicity, but as long as it's not putting anyone off and they keep their non-spam promise can it hurt?

sasja | January 23, 20:19 CET

sasja - it gives fans hope, but is it false hope?

I still get asked what is happening with Sci-Fi's "Serenity 2" movie.

gossi | January 23, 20:26 CET

I have added a note to the front of the post. As far as I'm concerned all of this should be fired off into /dev/null, which may still happen, but until then arm yourselves with knowledge.

Serenitymovie.org thread 1

Serenitymovie.org thread 2

herb | January 23, 20:34 CET

Until it comes from Joss, it doesn't exist. I wouldn't sign up for anything. Spammers are very sophisticated these days.

Nebula1400 | January 23, 20:40 CET

In the main, herb, the reason this needs to stay this time is (as the original poster, HudsonVC has pointed out on serenitymovie.org), links to this "Season 2" site have been flying through sites like Livejournals like wildfire since it cropped up. There need to be places which will come up in Google searches for this that have the WHOLE story, or at least the current state of the WHOLE story, in addition to random bloggers and journal-keepers going "wooohoo!"

WHEDONesque can provide that public service to people.

The One True b!X | January 23, 20:40 CET

I know I'm amongst fellow nerds when /dev/null is mentioned. Hurray!

gossi | January 23, 20:47 CET

again, I say, BULL.

Capt Mel | January 23, 20:48 CET

I voiced this suspicion on buffistas: phishing scheme. They are not uncommon.

Elvis | January 23, 20:50 CET

To be honest, I'm hoping one of the topics survives herb - so Joss sees it.

That company is just people who provide production support. In Costa Rica.
Why does it matter if Joss sees it?
What power does he have? He's not the boss of whether a show can be made. He can shop, pitch and hope to be hired.
Remember, Joss shopped Firefly all over Hell-and-Gone when Fox axed the show.
No one wanted Firefly back when it got killed.
If USA or TNT or FX (godforbid) or any of the other networks had wanted it, they'd've jumped on it.
Sci-Fi's parent company Universal/NBC bankrolled "Serenity" and they didn't even jump on bringing the series back to TV except in reruns.
At the end of the day, when the numbers are all run, the networks aren't willing to put money into a product--no matter how brilliant that product--that they don't think will bring profit (to them and the advertisers).
I don't get why that is so hard for people to understand.
*sigh*
: /

[ edited by AmazonGirl on 2006-01-23 18:55 ]

[ edited by AmazonGirl on 2006-01-23 18:56 ]

[ edited by AmazonGirl on 2006-01-23 20:24 ]

AmazonGirl | January 23, 20:53 CET

AmazonGirl-- Could be mistaken, but I believe the original post's intent was that Joss could see it, know it was wrong, and get it shut down. Or something like that. Then again, Joss having time to shut down all the wrong stuff on the internet... ;)

kalia | January 23, 20:57 CET

This is just going to cause false hope. JW has already stated that that another Firefly TV series will not happen. It's his baby and I accept that. The person running that website should to. At best we all can hope for a TV movie, mini-series or straight to DVD sequel.

DarenG | January 23, 21:05 CET

Could be mistaken, but I believe the original post's intent was that Joss could see it, know it was wrong, and get it shut down. Or something like that.

According to the owner of the site:

Q: Will Joss be involved?
A: The 'Verse without it's creator? Please, let's not be absurd. But Joss is very busy at the moment. We are taking care of all the mundane tasks and legwork that is required to untangle the legal issues to save Joss from any undue headaches. After all, it's really tough to be creative when you're surrounded by expensive lawyers.

To which an exremely handsome and all round sex symbol (all right it was me) asked:

So have you actually contacted Joss Whedon to let him know what you are trying to do?

To which the reply was:

Yes, I have contacted Joss' management. I have not received a reply from Joss personally yet, but now is not the time for him to be bothered with this. The obstacle lies with Fox, not with Joss. Once the rights are cleared, everything will fall into place. If Joss declines to be involved once the rights are secured, I will abandon the project.

I remain unconvinced that without even a nod or wink from Joss that this could go ahead.

Fox exec: So you want the rights to Firefly then, what does Joss Whedon think of this?
Seeker of Firefly rights: Now is not the time for him to be bothered with this.
Fox exec: Uhuh.

Note that that was my attempt at satire.

And for all I know, this could be the umpteenth production company that has tried to get the property rights for Firefly. I really can not see this happening in any shape or fashion.

Simon | January 23, 21:09 CET

Why does it matter if Joss sees it?
What power does he have? He's not the boss of whether a show can be made.

Joss probably has some legal input into the rights of the show (example: they legally had to ask Joss if he wanted involvement in the Buffy TV series after the movie).

I'm not saying Joss has power (MAD POWER!!:@), for clarity, I'm just suggesting it's nice he knows about something like this. Joss does read here (hello), and I think he probably wants to know if companies are mulling over something like FF in this way.

gossi | January 23, 21:12 CET

To which an exremely handsome and all round sex symbol (all right it was me) asked:

OMG. Simon are you trying to tell us that your Nathan Fillion?????

:)

I find it odd as well that this guy claims he has contacted Joss's management but they are not going to wait for his go ahead, to persue this. Movies and television rights tend to be owned by more than one eninty, there is a controlling owner in this case that would be FOX but that does not mean FOX is the only ones that have a say, and I believe on some level Joss still has rights to his creation, if not then FOX could easily go out and make verse shows without any input from him and run the verse into the ground. Fox is not cheap when it comes to licencing it's rights to anyone. So unless you go in with the backing of Joss or another major studio, I truthfully don't think you will get past the receptionist at the door.

BTW - I think Joss knew about it even before it hit here the first time. He has alot of people who would let him know upon seeing this for the first time. However, Universal might be interested in the use of that address if it is not legit.

[ edited by RavenU on 2006-01-23 19:24 ]

RavenU | January 23, 21:22 CET

I'd love to have hope, but well, im not holding out.

Spangel | January 23, 21:30 CET

Either way, if this is real or fake, or whatever, I just hope the fandom doesn't tear itself apart over this, and people don't get hurt emotionally speaking, because its quite an empotional topic for everyone, hopefuls and skeptics alike. Although it may be too late for this.... can't we just all get along? :'(. *sigh*

kurya | January 23, 21:34 CET

Herb - thanks to the links to those two threads. They made for interesting reading.

Cider | January 23, 21:37 CET

kurya - uhm, I don't think there's any great drama over it inside the fandom.

gossi | January 23, 21:38 CET

I'm with Elvis. (I love saying that.) I smell phishing scheme or some other kind of unsavory business.

phlebotinin | January 23, 21:40 CET

Still not liking this, but I do think a peep from Joss would probably put an end to this and the endless discussions around it. I just hope that not many people register without thinking.

Kessie | January 23, 21:40 CET

None of the details on the form are actually required, so you can register without any personally identifiable information.

I don't think it's anything really sinister, having looked into it - but I do think it's very unlikely anything would ever come of it.

gossi | January 23, 21:44 CET

It doesn't seem like a legitimate businessman would need to say, "Look at all the people who are registered!" if he wants to license rights. If he wanted to license rights, it seems like all he would have to say is, "Look at all my money!" Or, "Look at all the successful licensing deals I have in the past!" ;-)

If there is some wild chance that FOX is taking this guy seriously, and if all he does is run a production support company in Costa Rica, then it seems like it would be even worse for Firefly if he controls the rights than FOX. At least FOX does create television shows (even if they just cancel them right away); what has this guy actually made happen?

I also agree with the group saying that if this is legitimately happening, then Joss would surely know about it. Even if he is busy writing WW & Goners, something as big as "Someone is trying to license the rights to Firefly" would definitely be on Joss' radar. It's his baby, for gods' sake! Besides, doesn't ME have some ownership share of the Firefly rights, and so wouldn't they (that is, JW and/or CB) have to be in the discussion? And if Joss "hasn't been bothered with this," won't it be an ugly surprise for him if someone calls up and says, "Hi, Joss! I have the rights to your show! That's OK with you, right?"

This seems wrong, wrong, wrong. The description of events so far sound to me like a con man, not a businessman. If not a con man, then at least a man who doesn't know what he's doing: if this were a real businessman really negotiating for rights to something, I would bet you anything that we wouldn't even hear about it at all until the deal was finished!

billz | January 23, 22:10 CET

Just a thought if you really wanted to do something like this why not go to Nielsens and get the ratings info from the series, the series DVD sales, the movie box office stats, the movies DVD sales and rental stats. Then work on building a workable model to present to FOX, Joss, and shop it to some cable networks like FX, Sci-Fi, or TNT, those that have the capital to invest in it. That would be the logical way to go about it instead of asking fans to create market data for you that no one will believe.

Start with hard facts, not high hopes.

RavenU | January 23, 22:30 CET

I doubt that there is anything sinister afoot, but if I remember correctly, there was a "no new Firefly" clause attached to the Universal movie deal, precluding Fox from continuing the show on television for more than a few years.

Shakespeare | January 23, 22:31 CET

I know I've spoken up a lot in the past with regards to this issue. And I'll try to stay out of it this time, but I do want to say this. He is not a con man, and this is not a con, phishing scheme, or scam. He's a Browncoat, trying to bring back our show. Feel free to disagree with his methods or odds, but stop disparaging a fellow Browncoat. Pretty please...

JeremyN | January 23, 22:32 CET

And yes, even if after spending X amount of capital and time securing the rights if Joss wants no part, then I will drop it. What's the point if he's got no input for his own creation?

What's the point in spending X amount of capital and time securing the rights without getting the go ahead from Joss first? The way they say they're going about it doesn't make business sense to me.

Also, the explanation about not knowing how quickly news spreads on the Internet doesn't make sense to me either - not if you are at all familiar with this fandom and certainly not if you've worked on the Web in the last few years. It's not the 90's anymore.

killinj | January 23, 22:38 CET

He is not a con man, and this is not a con, phishing scheme, or scam. He's a Browncoat, trying to bring back our show.

How do you know this to be true?

killinj | January 23, 22:42 CET

Feel free to disagree with his methods or odds, but stop disparaging a fellow Browncoat.

Disagreeing with his methods or odds is exactly what we are doing. I don't think anyone is saying anything personal about this person, just that his "methods" seem like the methods used by a con man. We're trying to get at both the truth of what this person is about, and as well the odds of success if there is truth to what he is reporting. To do that, I think it is fair to question whether these are legitimate methods in the sense of "honest and legal" and in the sense of "likely to succeed." Honestly, we are very fair about being civil and not disparaging people on this board, and I think that is true in this thread, too.

I agree wtih killinj's point that this person is wasting his time if he is doing something that would not meet with Joss' approval. It does *not* make business sense. I also agree with RavenU's ideas for what would make business sense, as far as putting together facts to show to Fox. I think Shakespeare is right, too, about Joss or CB saying somewhere that there was something in the contract with Universal that said there couldn't be a new series for a while.

Although you may believe that this person is not a con or a scammer, JeremyN, I am convinced by these other arguments that this person is at least not using methods that make sense. That is important because we don't want Browncoats to look like, well, like we're in an episode of "I Love Lucy" trying some kooky scheme to get into Ricky's show. We don't want TPTB laughing at us, or being annoyed by us. We want them to know we love our show and will pay for tickets or DVDs or watch programs that are presented, not that we launch crazy rumors or unrealistic efforts to get more episodes.

We want to be taken seriously. What this person is doing doesn't sound like something to take seriously. :-(

billz | January 23, 23:01 CET

Jeremy - just to clarify, anybody can enter information on IMDB.

I would also point out on SerenityMovie.org he says:

"I've invested in or been a part of many different projects over the years. Two of these projects, which another poster mentioned, were an online dating service and a gaming company. "

The other poster is me. One is an online gambling site, and the other is this website (click here), which is based in the same location as his company (Cine Support). Their slogan is as follows; " If you are a single man looking to meet exotic ladies for a long-term relationship, then MyTica.com is for you! All of the lovely ladies (18-60 yrs) on our site are screened, qualified, and ready to meet single, foreign men who will love and respect them."

gossi | January 23, 23:09 CET

Killinj: It's made pretty clear in the threads mentioned above why I believe this isn't a scam. And besides, if it were a scam, that's the most elaborate, unanonymous, low return-on-effort scam I've run into. At most he's going to get a few hundred email addresses. And trust me there are MUCH easier ways to get millions of valid email addresses. If he were asking for CC or SS numbers, or even full home addresses, I could understand being a bit more concerned. Heck, my Direct-to-DVD campaign from two years ago asks for far more personal information.
www.fireflymovie.com/directdvd.html
And while I took some heat for my form, not as much as I've seen for this much less probing form.

billz: You bring up a very valid concern that too many of these campaigns may come across as "crying wolf" and irritate TBTB. However, in my communcation with Ace, I believe that this stands a better chance of succeeding than most. He has the money, contacts, industry experience and passion to make a valliant effort. Do I think it will work out? Probably not, but it's got better odds than one that doesn't have those things (especially the money!).

JeremyN | January 23, 23:14 CET

"If you are a single man looking to meet exotic ladies for a long-term relationship, then MyTica.com is for you! All of the lovely ladies (18-60 yrs) on our site are screened, qualified, and ready to meet single, foreign men who will love and respect them."

I would make a comment here just to tease gossi, but I can't stop chuckling long enough to come up with anything funny :D

zeitgeist | January 23, 23:21 CET

Damn, can't somebody use that website to buy me a 'qualified' woman?

By the way, I'm sure there's some subtext I shouldn't mention about bringing that site up *cough*equalitynow*cough*

Again, this kind of things doesn't make anybody a con artist at all - but in terms of 'Should we be circulating this as a business idea for Firefly'... Uhm. Well, they might be able to recast Inara I suppose.

gossi | January 23, 23:25 CET

If I'm not a Browncoat, I can point and laugh, right?

Jeremy, much love and respect for you I have.

This guy? Not so much. I'm waiting for him to ask for my bank account info on behalf of a Nigerian diplomat.

I think it's the part where he says that Joss shouldn't be bothered right now. Like he's chilling at his house for Sunday Shakespeare, playing Lear or something. It's disingenuous.

I was avoiding all snark and comment until the dating service thing. Hilarious. I wonder if I'm a qualified woman.

Allyson | January 23, 23:37 CET

Allyson, don't, I'll get Ace Rimmer to register you on the site!

The more I look at this, the more confused I get. The IP he's now posting at on SerenityMovie.org is exactly the same IP as his 'glock' fan account he'd been pimping the site with. And, he's been emailing it to fans with websites today (hence this thread, in fact). But he says he was caught off guard with the traffic it received.

Well, Ace, sorry dude - but that's because you're going on websites pretending to fans pimping your own site.

Where I fall on this issue is this: I don't have a clue! If the guy is a serious business man, what the hell is he doing up at 5am on a fan site and in the chat function? Is this a business, or.. uhm.. I've no idea.

I just feel sorry for the fans who read this on LiveJournal and think season 2 is on the way, along with the Sci-Fi Serenity 2 which is apparently in development.

Hurray!

gossi | January 23, 23:47 CET

I think we should stay focused on FireflySeason2.com's methods and proposals. And when I say "I think" I mean "We will". For the time being, let's assume that this is a genuine effort to bring back Firefly. So feel free to praise or indeed criticise this effort. We're slowly drifting towards the realms of character assassination and I'd rather that didn't happen.

I think that it's a badly thought idea which could be handled a lot better.

Simon | January 23, 23:54 CET

gossi - Ace Rimmer? Where did that come from? Not knowing I could see it being taken as an insult. Interesting info re: multiple accounts, ETA- but as Simon says, criticize the idea not the individual.

zeitgeist | January 23, 23:54 CET

True. My internet tongue is back to bite mode - apologies, Simon.

zeitgeist - I meant Ace Underhill. Too much Red Dwarf for me.

[ edited by gossi on 2006-01-23 21:56 ]

gossi | January 23, 23:55 CET

Hmm, maybe this season will be "Firefly: The Companion Training House Years." ;-)

I thought it was weird that if this person is supposed to be a Browncoat, that he just registered on Serenitymovie.org today. If he's interested in showing how many fans there are, wouldn't he have been investigating the site before today? And then gossi finds out that he registered the same IP as another user, the user who was pimping the site?

ETA to be clear, at Simon's suggestion: I think the information we have about this plan has some parts to it that don't sound legitimate, and I want to point out the parts that make me question what is going on.

[ edited by billz on 2006-01-23 22:25 ]

billz | January 23, 23:56 CET

billz please see what I said three posts up.

Simon | January 24, 00:00 CET

A bit more information.

gossi | January 24, 00:08 CET

where's joss?

ChosenOne5376 | January 24, 00:11 CET

Sorry, Simon. I didn't think comparing you to Nathan Fillion would be a character assination, but I could see how it may be taken that way.

:)

[ edited by RavenU on 2006-01-23 22:13 ]

RavenU | January 24, 00:12 CET

Changing kiddy diapers, writing, saving the world AND cooking. All at once. Super Joss, in fact. Or maybe even Wonder Joss.

gossi | January 24, 00:13 CET

I think Joss only stops by to leave us his thoughts on important subjects, like slash.

:)

RavenU | January 24, 00:15 CET

No, he also defends The Matrix here, which makes him my personal hero. Because, you know, it's all about the human condition (I'm obsessed with it, Arnold!) on so many levels, and it has action set pieces. Just to be clear: I'm pimping The Matrix again.

gossi | January 24, 00:19 CET

Simon, I appreciate your note, but I have to say I still have some doubts about whether this person is for real. I would like to continue to state that I think it sounds like something is not legitimate; is that OK to say, not as a flame, but a statement of doubt?

billz | January 24, 00:21 CET

I was going to snark and run, but Allyson beat me to it. ;-)

OzLady | January 24, 00:23 CET

The proof of the pudding, in all seriousness, will be in 12 months if anything has happened. They don't need to secure the backing of fans -- they need to secure the backing of finance.

gossi | January 24, 00:24 CET

Hear, hear, gossi!

billz | January 24, 00:27 CET

Good point, Simon.

How about this?:

From way back yon in the early days of the Bronze, anytime Joss Whedon has ever needed help, which has always been rare, he's found a way to ask for it. Kai Cole asked Kiba for help, and that's how F:IA was born.

Getting people to help promote Serenity, all that? Joss asked for support. Kerry fundraiser? Same thing.

The man, in my limited experience, is not shy.

He's also a very capable man, and if what he wanted right now more than anything in the world was to buy the rights for Firefly...well, he'd be the guy to do that.

Jeremy speaks of connections, money, and experience of these folks.

Mr. Whedon has all three of these things in spades. Why would he need these guys? What is it exactly that they can do, that Joss Whedon cannot?

I also think it's crappy to force Joss Whedon to say "no" in such a public way. It appears as though unless Joss makes some sort of public statement, the operators of the site will continue on stressing some sort of stance that because he hasn't protested, then it's all good.

But if he were to post and say, "no. this is not how Things Work. if I need help, I'll let you know, but thank you for thinking of me," would that end these sorts of Rube Goldbergesque plans/websites from occuring in the future?

It all seems terribly disrespectful to the creator.

Of course, I could be wrong. Usually am.

Allyson | January 24, 00:28 CET

I still think you're worth pink, Allyson.

gossi | January 24, 00:30 CET

It's made pretty clear in the threads mentioned above why I believe this isn't a scam.

JeremyN, with all due respect, you stated as FACT that "He is not a con man, and this is not a con, phishing scheme, or scam. He's a Browncoat, trying to bring back our show." I merely asked how you knew that to be true. If you'd stated it as a opinion I wouldn't have asked you about it. I'm going by what is posted here - not other threads on other boards.

killinj | January 24, 00:31 CET

Nicely and convincingly said, Allyson.

phlebotinin | January 24, 00:34 CET

I know what Joss is up to. He's writing up the screenplay for the Buffy the Vampire Slayer motion picture I've been dreaming about. I miss the buffyverse.......can you tell?

[ edited by zeitgeist on 2006-01-23 22:55 ]

ChosenOne5376 | January 24, 00:37 CET

Nothing to add to the ground rules set down by the other admins and mods above. Let's keep the discussion off the personality behind the idea, s'il vous plait.

I do think that, given the confusing nature of all this, and the strong emotions it brings forth, it would not be a good idea for Joss to enter the discussion. If there is anything behind it all, discussion needs to happen with Joss on a formal level, not in interweb board exchanges. And if there's only smoke and mirrors, he really shouldn't be wasting his time on it. That's my tuppence ha'penny opinion, anyways.

SoddingNancyTribe | January 24, 00:37 CET

Why would he need these guys? What is it exactly that they can do, that Joss Whedon cannot?

Allyson, you said that much better than I have been able to!

SNT, I see your point, and will be careful to change my words to "this plan" instead of "this person," since I don't mean there is something about the person, just about the plan.

If we were talking about Paul Allen or Mark Cuban (I mostly know of jillionaires in sports, not movies, please forgive me), I might say, "Well, it's possible this plan has so much money behind it that FOX just couldn't say no." I don't think that's the case here. So, even if this plan is 100% for real and really intended to show love for Firefly, the plan may not have what it needs to accomplish something that Joss, with all his passion and connections and talent and track record, could not.

I still have doubts. I question using the same IP to register 2 users on Serenitymovie.org. I question using Universal's address then changing it after we questioned it and said it looked funny. I question a statement about the plan that the person backing the plan "was surprised that the word got around the Internet so fast" when part of the plan was asking people to register on a website, and then advertising the website on Serenitymovie.org, meaning they were trying to make word go around the interweb faster, which doesn't make sense to me, IMO.

I respect JeremyN of donetheimpossible, and Andrew and Ty from browncoatsriseagain, and I see that they have met with or talked to the person behind the plan and found something about the plan to believe in, but I have not been convinced yet for the reasons above (first, there are weird-sounding things, and second, I don't get why this plan might succeed where Joss did not). Here's what I hope: the plan is for real, but maybe it is just not a good business proposal. I hope that by discussing this, everyone involved will think twice about what we're hearing, then come to their own decisions based on facts, not hopes. I hope!

billz | January 24, 01:02 CET

I said it before (probably in one of those deleted threads) and I'll say it again - the website is confusing and misleading in its language and the fact that it doesn't state clearly (in fact, it entirely fails to state) what it's about. I mean, stuff like this?

"Please encourage others to visit and help define how Firefly Season 2 will be made available to the public."

(That appears after you submit a "profile").

Language like this makes it sound like it is an official venture, when it is not.

In my mind that is just a plain wrong thing to do, the wrong way to go about things. It only leads to rumour and confusion.

My 2 cents.

(Edited to fix typos).

[ edited by Relight on 2006-01-24 00:06 ]

Relight | January 24, 02:04 CET

Something about that site is setting off my internet-BS alarm.

But maybe I've just grown too skeptical.

I'm still not getting any hopes up, there is nothing official about it, at most it's just another, somewhat fancier, petition. But why does it make false claims? I think the site, if it is legit, needs to make a couple disclaimers.

AnotherFireflyfan | January 24, 02:43 CET

Well, the discussion on the serenitymovie.org forums seems to indicate that this guy is prepared to fund the endeavour, from his own assets. He doesn't give a lot of details though.

Relight | January 24, 03:02 CET

Well I'm kinda glad this got posted again because I missed it earlier. I don't really see any valuable or credible 'payoff' if it is a scam so I'm willing to believe it's a legit attempt. But if that's true I mainly just feel sorry for the guy. Obviously a fair amount of time and effort went into this and I don't believe for a split second that anything will come of it.

(And I would, of course, be happy to eat crow...)

As Allyson said, if Joss needed or wanted help like this, he would've asked for it. And I really don't think this is the right time for any revival attempts. Let Joss make some movies, see where it takes him. Let Serenity seep into pop culture and see if maybe it gathers a new audience over time (don't make me quote the list again of now-classic movies that bombed at the box office at the time) and see where the future takes it all. Who knows.

EdDantes | January 24, 03:11 CET

Interviews with Joss have been linked on this very site in which he states the series will NOT be picked back up, he will only do more Firefly films if anything. Its over.

pongluver | January 24, 03:21 CET

As I understood it, Joss has said there will be no more Firefly because the franchise is now Serenity. Presumably, that could be feature film, TV/DVD movie, mini-series, or even full TV series (again, "Serenity", not "Firefly"). I don't think Joss has ruled anything out.

ETA: Went and looked up a quote from this interview from 2 months ago:

Uh, you know, I have every vision. Even an opera. It’s very beautiful, very beautiful, full of pain, but full of love. (Laughs) Ultimately, you know, I’m just waiting to see how things fall out. The DVD sales will, of course, affect the future of the “Serenity” world...or universe, I should say. But I can’t predict that any better than I could predict what would happen at the box office, so I’m just waiting to see, and I’ll just keep waiting until someone comes to me and says, “More TV! More movies!” Or whatever it is. Whatever format it is. If it’s a chance to work with these actors again, to live in this world again, I’m there!

I don't think this site is the right way to do it, but I think the principle of keeping the verse alive in any form is still good.

[ edited by jam2 on 2006-01-24 01:51 ]

jam2 | January 24, 03:41 CET

Simon, mods, people with influence, people with a genuine love of llamas, Ben/Glory, etc.

This is the third time this thread has appeared and the third time the conversation seems to be going in the same direction. But I implore you not to delete the thread again - it's important that people learn about the site through Whedonesque as well as learning about the concerns we have over its legitimacy. If it's deleted yet again, it will crop up again - or people may stumble across it uninformed.

crossoverman | January 24, 03:44 CET

I really agree with KeithG: it's important that people learn about the site through Whedonesque as well as learning about the concerns we have over its legitimacy. Having a trusted source of information (here on the black) and a place to discuss it is best, IMO!

That said, I am suddenly thinking of the Futurama ep where the rulers of Omicron Persei 9 demand to see the final episode of "Single Female Lawyer." Nothing wrong with them wanting it; they just weren't equipped to get the results they wanted (although Leila looked great in her miniskirt & fake second eye).

billz | January 24, 04:01 CET

I am suddenly thinking of the Futurama ep where the rulers of Omicron Persei 9

Oh, billz, it was Omicron Persei 8...

What were you thinking?!?!!!

:-)

crossoverman | January 24, 04:27 CET

So what Billz is suggesting is that we all get together and act out how we want to see Firefly go....

Rogue Slayer | January 24, 04:48 CET

[I]t's important that people learn about the site through Whedonesque as well as learning about the concerns we have over its legitimacy

Speaking only for myself - and that's usually the first sign of trouble, - this thread is probably here to stay, so long as people adhere to the usual guidelines.

SoddingNancyTribe | January 24, 04:50 CET

I actually did catch the previous threads on this subject prior to them being deleted and i would have to agree with Keith G that it makes more sense that this information remain here as a way of informing anyone who might stumble across this site by other means.

Whedonesque is a highly trusted resource for Joss fans all over the world and just this thread alone has highlighted the good, bad and possibly ugly sides to this venture. Whilst i certainly would not expect this site to endorse the idea i think it important that we acknowledge it's existence.

Personally, having read all the comments in this and the previous threads i'm remaining cautiously dubious yet worryingly optimistic about the whole deal being even remotely possible. What my head tells me is a far cry from what my heart tells me but i'll keep an open mind for now.

Buffysmglover | January 24, 06:27 CET

Well, the discussion on the serenitymovie.org forums seems to indicate that this guy is prepared to fund the endeavour, from his own assets. He doesn't give a lot of details though.

Well, here's one important detail that Underhill mentioned in chat last night (I did post it to the serenitymovie.org site last night): The plan is to secure the rights to film two episodes and then shop it to networks, with FOX having the right of first refusal.

In essence, the plan is to make another pilot -- despite the fact that we already have more than a dozen TV episodes and a major motion picture sitting around as advertisements for the idea in case any network or studio is interested.

The One True b!X | January 24, 06:59 CET

The plan is to secure the rights to film two episodes and then shop it to networks, with FOX having the right of first refusal.

The more I hear, the more ridiculous it sounds. There is no way that Joss Whedon would sink his time and effort into making yet another pilot to shop around to random networks; no way he would give Fox the first right of refusal. I think Joss has more faith in the franchise standing on what has already come before rather than take three steps backward and making another TV series pilot.

I mean, come on, "Firely" already had two pilots! :-)

crossoverman | January 24, 07:21 CET

Oh, billz, it was Omicron Persei 8...

D'oh! My bad! *shakes head sadly* It is true what they say (and watch me mess this up, too) -- men are from Omicron Persei 8, and women are from Omicron Persei 9. ;-)

Excellent catch, KeithG! Plus, I totally agree with you and theonetruebix that Firefly has had enough pilots/test episodes. No need for more.

ETA: Forgot to send a big LOL to RogueSlayer! I actually hadn't thought it through that far, but now that you bring it up -- lol!

[ edited by billz on 2006-01-24 05:49 ]

billz | January 24, 07:44 CET

The plan is to secure the rights to film two episodes and then shop it to networks, with FOX having the right of first refusal.

In essence, the plan is to make another pilot...

Well now. That has an effect on the landscape.

gorramit | January 24, 07:46 CET

Well now. That has an effect on the landscape.

Yes, in that it makes it even more unlikely that this thing is legit. What possible reason would Fox have to sell the rights to someone to make a pilot of a series they already own the rights to? Even if they have first right of refusal, surely they've effectively had that already - what with two pilots and a series to convince they it won't fly.

Sadly, Serenity's box office performance is probably not evidence they made the wrong call about the series.

crossoverman | January 24, 07:56 CET

I think they should act out the plan with bikini-clad Costa Rican sockpuppets.

KIDDING!

Please don't ban me.

Allyson | January 24, 07:57 CET

If you have questions you'd like to pose directly to Underhill, he's apparently in the SerenityMovie.org chat room right now (Mon., Jan 23, 8:49 PST).

.... Annnd that was an unmitigated disaster, to quote b!X. A zoo. Will be rescheduled with moderation later.

[ edited by HudsonVC on 2006-01-24 07:01 ]

[ edited by HudsonVC on 2006-01-24 07:06 ]

HudsonVC | January 24, 08:49 CET

Of course he is not actually answering the questions as much as massaging and deflecting them, IMHO.

TamaraC | January 24, 08:57 CET

And of course, he said Tim will be available in May.

?!?!?!??!?!?!?!

ETA: And the part where he tried to hire Chris Buchanan.

C'mon. C'mon.

This is the awesomest thing ever.

[ edited by Allyson on 2006-01-24 07:15 ]

Allyson | January 24, 09:11 CET

I am no longer concerned about this. Now it is just funny.

TamaraC | January 24, 09:18 CET

I need to thank this guy for another chapter in my book.

So.

This is a project by a dude whose previous business venture is a Costa Rican "dating" site filled with pics of bikini clad tarts, who tried to hire Chris Buchanan and thinks Tim Minear is available in May to work on the pilot he will hire Joss to write and direct once he secures the rights from 20th.

This is a fair recap, right?

Allyson | January 24, 09:22 CET

Seems fair...this is either delusional or a scam. Or possibly a delusional scam, which just makes it unnecessarily complicated.

And funny.

Allyson you are so wonderfully mean!

The Devil's Robot | January 24, 09:30 CET

If that's really how this chat went, the tenor of my posts on this subject just became SO much less serious.

b!X? Did you log it?

[ edited by HudsonVC on 2006-01-24 07:40 ]

HudsonVC | January 24, 09:38 CET

"Mr. Whedon has all three of these things in spades. Why would he need these guys? What is it exactly that they can do, that Joss Whedon cannot?"

yep - I'm with Allyson.

Harmalicious | January 24, 09:38 CET

Over at the Browncoat boards, "Kathe" has another chat highlight:

http://www.serenitymovie.org/browncoats/forums/viewtopic.php?p=52403#52403

AUnderhill stated in tonight's chat the following:

"I'VE SAVED QUITE A FEW PRODUCTIONS IN THE PAST, LOGISTICS AND PLANNING FOR PRODUCTIONS IS MY BUSINESS."

And when asked to explain, replied:

"Other productions are not relevant to this conversation."

HudsonVC | January 24, 09:47 CET

Translation: You don't need to see his identification.

These aren't the droids you're looking for.

He can go about his business.

Move along.

The force can sometimes have great power on the weak-minded, but I doubt anyone here is buying this anymore (if, I dare say, anyone ever did).

gorramit | January 24, 09:52 CET

As much as I appreciate all the pithy and pertinent comments above, my personal take at this point is "Bored Now."

cronopio | January 24, 09:53 CET

Unedited chat log is here:

http://www.serenitymovie.org/browncoats/forums/viewtopic.php?p=52422#52422

Hard to read, Any comedy? Any insight? Any hope?

HudsonVC | January 24, 09:53 CET

I think it comes back to what I started saying after last night's chat debacle: I'm past thinking this is a scam, although I won't apologize for raising the question, because it carried all the hallmarks of a classic scam when it launched.

At this point, I think it's simply someone who is in over his head. And, in the end, people are free to be in over their heads. I just worry about the subset of fans who are so dreamy-eyed about any mention of a new series that they won't actually examine what's going on.

The One True b!X | January 24, 10:12 CET

Lots of venom in that chat. Let's keep the discourse here civil, regardless of what you think of the guy's plans and intentions (speak your mind, but respectfully). Like bix, I think it's just a guy in over his head, not a scam.

jam2 | January 24, 10:22 CET

You're right, of course, jam2.

I fully concur with b!X's analysis.

HudsonVC | January 24, 10:26 CET

Well yes, of course we all want to be civil (more or less), but what I think some of us find disturbing, even absent some intent to scam, is the colossal level of naivete on display here. It seems strange that some do not realise the scale of what is being talked about here--the rights to Firefly/Serenity are controlled by two huge corporations, which, even if they do not intend to immediately exploit them, will jealously guard them for the forseeable future. The rights are no doubt worth millions. And production costs, anywhere near the level of the original series would be millions. Why, in their right mind, would Universal lease Mr. Underhill sets from their production, as he seems to be proposing, so that he could start his? It's ludicrous.

[ edited by The Devil's Robot on 2006-01-24 08:49 ]

The Devil's Robot | January 24, 10:48 CET

Important parts of chat in #firefly (up to where I got bored searching, lol)
-----------------
Underhill: The plan is 1. secure the rights from 20th.
Underhill: 2. produce a season opener episode
Underhill: (on our bankroll)
Underhill: 3. sell that to networks and cable operators
Underhill: Not really a pilot.
Underhill: If nobody picks it up, we will sell directly to the fans via On Demand and DVD
Underhill: It's not about just money with Fox
Underhill: The deal is very fragile, their egos are at stake.

Underhill: Start up money is coming from my other businesses.

Underhill: First run could be to On Demand, then second run to Sci-fi or whomever else
Underhill: It would be enough to cover the costs of production

Underhill: I have approached Joss.
Underhill: I don't have an official word from him yet.
Underhill: Joss has spent enough time trying to fight with Fox, he's moved on, I'm taking over his charge.
Underhill: If I get the rights, and Joss says he's not interested, I'll drop the project. End of story
-----
Mmhmm. Yea, sure.

But hey, I'd love to be proved wrong.

[ edited by Satertek on 2006-01-24 09:23 ]

Satertek | January 24, 11:17 CET

And as jam2 reminded us, please let's keep this civil. This isn't a forum to disparage others. And I'm not sure how stating this individual's location is helpful. Thanks.

SoddingNancyTribe | January 24, 11:26 CET

That transcript is insane! Still, I don't think that Mr. Underhill made statements that convinced me he is anything but in over his head.

Here are some questions about things I just didn't understand in what he said: Underhill kept stating, Fox owns all the IP rights to FF. What does "IP" mean? Also, if you make a "season opener," which is what Underhill called the episode he wants to make, without committing to make a whole season, then it comes out just like a pilot. It's just what words you choose for it.

Underhill: First run could be to On Demand, then second run to Sci-fi or whomever else

OnDemand doesn't offer first-run shows, do they?

Underhill counters the argument about Universal having the rights for Firefly not to be shown on TV by mentioning Comcast on demand is running episodes. That's not what is meant though, is it? Universal's rights are supposed to be about new episodes on TV, right?

Underhill: Joss has spent enough time trying to fight with Fox, he's moved on, I'm taking over his charge.

I have been careful to avoid saying anything personal about Underhill, but this really seems like a very "Mary Sue" comment, IMO. "I'm the one to help my heroes." I would expect a person negotiating a business deal to say something like, "I look forward to working with Joss," not "taking over." It's just a poor choice of words, but -- wow, really poor.

Underhill: Tim is available in May, which may fit our timeline nicely.

Wow. Wow. Won't Joss feel like an underachiever for not being able to get a new series off the ground at all, when this company will be able to get a new series ready to go to Tim (for what? writing? producing?) by May? In other words, I think this shows some unrealistic expectations about what can be achieved, IMO.

Underhill: I am in this chat room to answer questions because people have been posting slander on the boards about things they know nothing about. {snip} Underhill: skeptics are fine. It's the folks with a negative agenda to burn all newcomes that I can't stand.

Technically, it's libel (not slander), but questions are not the same as libel. The bigger question I don't get is, why is Mr. Underhill spending so much time trying to win over individuals who are writing troll-y things? Why not ignore them?

Good advice for myself. I think I'm going to start ignoring this.

billz | January 24, 11:29 CET

Thing that bugs me is it just seems way too soon for this. The Serenity DVD only came out a few weeks ago. It still needs time to settle in. Besides, Joss is still working on Wonder Woman and I bet he's got something lined up after that as well, so I wouldn't expect to hear Firefly talks again for at least a year.

Satertek | January 24, 11:43 CET

Of course, as per SNT, civility is paramount, and as much as we have no personal knowledge of Mr. Underhill, we should stear clear of the name-calling, eye-rolling etc. (Unless we're Allyson--wasn't she going to be our executioner/scolder a while back?)

The *content* of the proposal is fair game, I believe.

(Bows respectfully in direction of SoddingNancyTribe.)

[ edited by The Devil's Robot on 2006-01-24 09:57 ]

The Devil's Robot | January 24, 11:52 CET

I think by "IP" he meant Intellectual Property. Though I'm just guessing.

As far as I know, OnDemand has not tried out first run programming yet. The closest they've come, I think, is having episodes of the premium channels' programming available shortly after they first air. (Maybe the day after?)

And I think he took your advice, billz. He's announced that he's no longer discussing this publicly.

As for Tim, at this time, no one knows what his availability will be in May. He currently has a project in development.

Kristen R | January 24, 11:55 CET

Wow, Kristen, you really made my day (well, laaaaate night) by answering my questions so fast. Kewl! Word to Tim! ;-)

billz | January 24, 12:29 CET

Kristen wrote:

As for Tim, at this time, no one knows what his availability will be in May. He currently has a project in development.

Please GOD let that project include a blonde ensouled vampire!

Okay, i'm reaching here, but i'm reaching to a happy place! :)

Buffysmglover | January 24, 16:11 CET

This is a project by a dude whose previous business venture is a Costa Rican "dating" site filled with pics of bikini clad tarts, who tried to hire Chris Buchanan and thinks Tim Minear is available in May to work on the pilot he will hire Joss to write and direct once he secures the rights from 20th.

This is a fair recap, right?

Oh god, Allyson. Thanks for all those who recapped last night, I was busy having a life so hadn't seen it. I'm concerned all this is being seen as taking place on one of my sites, but not sure what to do about it yet.

gossi | January 24, 18:32 CET

Well, gossi, as the person who launched this discussion over at your site (backed up mightily by b!X), I thank you for hosting it.

Despite the aggressively juvenile tone in some quarters, and the snark, including my own, which I don't usually associate with this particular fan ethos -- that chat transcript! -- FFS2.com really, really needed a closer look. I'm glad your boards were there.

B!X can attest to my usual, enthusiastic support of Browncoat fan efforts. This was different; there was a discrepancy that was going unchecked. Imagine if everyone had rallied behind that site and then found out some of the particulars. We would have looked like TrekUnited.

Anyway. Thank you. Locking the threads was a good idea. Hope you're not deleting them, or at least not deleting everything in them. Barring disaster, I'm through commenting on this. I wish Mr. Underhill the best of luck.

[ edited by HudsonVC on 2006-01-24 18:40 ]

[ edited by HudsonVC on 2006-01-24 18:42 ]

HudsonVC | January 24, 20:29 CET

Worth noting: The FireflySeason2.com site has amended its information a bit. New buttons describe the site's mission in a little more detail -- and stress that they won't be soliciting funds.

HudsonVC | January 25, 13:24 CET

This story has made Slashdot, for info. It's also been mentioned in a daily TV magazine column.

gossi | January 26, 03:17 CET

Direct link to the Slashdot discussion:

http://slashdot.org/articles/06/01/25/2146257.shtml

HudsonVC | January 26, 04:20 CET

While I appreciate the enthusiasm of other fans, they seem to forget that Firefly is Joss Whedon's project, not ours.

Before starting a campaign to bring back Firefly in one form or another - they should really ask if any of what they are doing is ok with Joss. It's probably not.

I am sure he has hiw own ideas as to how we want Firefly to proceed.

Here is another case of a fan site that meant well but didn't think it through. http://www.browncoatsriseagain.com

hazyone101 | January 26, 19:28 CET

I'd just like to chip in and say "thanks" for this thread. I wasn't sure at all what to make of the site when I came across it, but now I have a more coloured in picture. I won't be taking this seriously unless proven otherwise.

And now: back to business as usual :-)

GVH | January 26, 21:20 CET

I'd also like to say thanks for this thread. I missed it when doing a search and posted a story from Moviehole now deleted. Guess I'll just have to remain cautiously optamistic.

Crypto | January 27, 17:27 CET

January 23 2006